5G Split Option 6 and Split Option 8: The Complete Guide for 2026
- Neeraj Verma
- 4 days ago
- 17 min read
Introduction
The architecture of modern 5G networks is anything but simple. At the heart of 5G Radio Access Network (RAN) design lies a critical concept: functional splitting. Specifically, 5G Split Option 6 and Split Option 8 have emerged as two of the most discussed architectural choices for telecom engineers and network designers worldwide. Understanding these split options is no longer optional — it is a fundamental skill for anyone pursuing a career in the telecom industry in 2026.
When engineers talk about disaggregating the 5G base station (gNB), they are referring to how different protocol stack layers are distributed between centralized and distributed units. This disaggregation determines latency, bandwidth requirements, scalability, and cost — all of which directly impact how operators build and monetize their networks. Whether you are a fresher entering the field or an experienced professional upskilling, knowing how these split options work gives you a significant edge.
In this comprehensive guide, we break down 5G Split Option 6 and Split Option 8 in full technical detail, compare them side by side, and explain why mastering this topic can transform your telecom career — especially when you learn from the best, like Apeksha Telecom and industry expert Bikas Kumar Singh.
Table of Contents
What Is Functional Split in 5G RAN?
The Concept of RAN Disaggregation
In traditional LTE and early 5G deployments, a base station was a monolithic unit — all protocol processing happened in one place. As 5G evolved, the 3GPP community recognized the need to break apart these functions for greater flexibility. This is called functional splitting or RAN disaggregation, and it is defined in 3GPP TR 38.801.
The idea is straightforward: the gNB (5G base station) can be divided into a Central Unit (CU), a Distributed Unit (DU), and a Radio Unit (RU). Each part handles specific layers of the 5G protocol stack — from the high-level PDCP and RRC layers at the top, down to the low-level physical layer (PHY) and Radio Frequency (RF) functions at the bottom. The interface between the DU and RU is called the fronthaul, while the interface between CU and DU is the midhaul, and between CU and the core is the backhaul.
3GPP defined eight possible split options — labeled Option 1 through Option 8 — each representing a different boundary point in the protocol stack. Among these, Split Option 6 and Split Option 8 represent very different philosophies of how to divide the intelligence of the network, and choosing between them has profound consequences for network design and performance.
The 5G Protocol Stack at a Glance
Before diving into each option, it helps to visualize the 5G NR protocol stack from top to bottom:
RRC (Radio Resource Control) — highest layer
SDAP (Service Data Adaptation Protocol)
PDCP (Packet Data Convergence Protocol)
RLC (Radio Link Control)
MAC (Medium Access Control)
High PHY (upper physical layer — coding, modulation, HARQ)
Low PHY (lower physical layer — FFT, beamforming, PRACH)
RF (Radio Frequency) — lowest layer
Each split option defines where the CU-DU or DU-RU boundary sits in this stack. The higher the split, the more intelligence goes to the distributed unit; the lower the split, the more intelligence is centralized.
Understanding 5G Split ption 6
Where Is the Split Point?
5G Split Option 6 places the functional boundary between the MAC layer and the High PHY layer. This means:
The Distributed Unit (DU) handles everything from the RLC layer upward — including MAC scheduling, RLC processing, PDCP, SDAP, and RRC (when co-located).
The Radio Unit (RU) handles the High PHY, Low PHY, and RF functions.
In other words, with Split Option 6, the MAC scheduler remains in the DU — closer to the radio but still centralized enough to make scheduling decisions without extreme latency constraints. This is a higher-layer split compared to Option 7 or Option 8.
Why Split Option 6 Matters
The MAC scheduler is one of the most computationally intensive and time-sensitive functions in the 5G stack. It must react to channel conditions in near-real-time to allocate radio resources efficiently among users. By keeping the MAC in the DU — rather than pushing it further toward the RU — Split Option 6 relaxes the fronthaul latency requirement significantly compared to lower-layer splits.
This makes Split Option 6 particularly attractive for scenarios where fronthaul transport is constrained — for example, in rural or semi-urban deployments where fiber is expensive or latency is harder to control. Operators can still achieve a meaningful degree of centralization (since upper layers remain in the CU) without demanding the ultra-low latency links that lower-layer splits require.
Key Characteristics of Split Option 6
Fronthaul interface: Between MAC/PHY boundary (DU-RU interface)
Fronthaul latency requirement: Moderate (in the range of 100–250 µs, less stringent than Option 7/8)
Fronthaul bandwidth: Lower than Option 7 or 8 because data is in MAC PDU format, not IQ samples
RU complexity: The RU must handle high-PHY functions such as channel coding/decoding, HARQ soft-combining, and rate matching
Centralization benefit: PDCP, RRC, and SDAP can still be centralized in the CU
Scheduler location: MAC scheduler resides in DU — enables real-time radio resource management without extreme latency constraints
Advantages of Split Option 6
Relaxed fronthaul latency — more practical for operators without dedicated fiber
Lower fronthaul bandwidth compared to Option 8 (no raw IQ samples)
Suitable for Time Division Duplex (TDD) and Frequency Division Duplex (FDD) scenarios
Allows meaningful CU centralization for functions like mobility management and inter-cell coordination
Supports a wide range of deployment scenarios including macro, small cell, and C-RAN environments
Limitations of Split Option 6
The RU becomes more complex since it must handle high-PHY functions
Less centralization compared to Option 8 — some functions are still distributed
HARQ retransmissions must be handled at the RU level, reducing the ability to coordinate HARQ across cells centrally
Harder to implement advanced coordinated multi-point (CoMP) transmission across sites
Understanding 5G Split Option 8
Where Is the Split Point?
5G Split Option 8 places the functional boundary between the Low PHY layer and the RF layer. This is the lowest possible functional split in the 5G NR stack. Under this architecture:
The Remote Radio Unit (RRU/RU) handles only the RF functions — power amplification, filtering, digital-to-analog conversion, and antenna transmission.
The Baseband Unit (BBU) or central DU handles everything else: RRC, SDAP, PDCP, RLC, MAC, High PHY, and Low PHY — including functions like the FFT/IFFT, precoding, digital beamforming, and PRACH detection.
This is the most aggressive form of centralization. Essentially, the RU in Split Option 8 becomes a "dumb pipe" — it merely transmits and receives RF signals with minimal intelligence of its own.
The CPRI/eCPRI Fronthaul in Split Option 8
The fronthaul interface for Split Option 8 is based on CPRI (Common Public Radio Interface) or its enhanced successor eCPRI. This interface carries raw IQ (In-phase/Quadrature) samples between the central unit and the remote radio head. IQ samples represent the digitized baseband signal before any signal processing has occurred, and transmitting them requires enormous amounts of bandwidth.
For a standard 100 MHz 5G NR channel with 64 antennas (a common Massive MIMO configuration), the CPRI fronthaul can demand tens of Gbps of sustained throughput — far more than Split Option 6 or Option 7.x. This is why Split Option 8 is sometimes called the "traditional CPRI split" — it was widely used in 4G C-RAN deployments before more flexible split options became available in 5G.
Key Characteristics of Split Option 8
Fronthaul interface: Low PHY/RF boundary — carries raw IQ samples via CPRI or eCPRI
Fronthaul latency requirement: Extremely tight — typically under 250 µs one-way, with some implementations requiring under 100 µs
Fronthaul bandwidth: Very high — can reach tens of Gbps for Massive MIMO configurations
RU complexity: Very low — the RU is essentially a Remote Radio Head (RRH) with only RF functionality
Centralization benefit: Maximum — all baseband processing, PHY, MAC, RLC, PDCP, and RRC can be centralized in a BBU hotel or cloud data center
Coordination: Enables tight inter-cell coordination (joint processing, CoMP) at the centralized BBU
Advantages of Split Option 8
Maximum centralization — BBU pooling and resource sharing across many remote radio heads
Simplified, low-cost Remote Radio Heads (RRHs) at the antenna site
Excellent support for advanced coordinated processing — CoMP, inter-cell interference coordination
Proven technology with a mature ecosystem from 4G C-RAN experience
Centralized baseband makes upgrades and maintenance easier — software changes happen in the data center, not at the tower
Limitations of Split Option 8
Enormous fronthaul bandwidth — impractical without dedicated dark fiber or high-capacity optical transport
Ultra-low fronthaul latency — extremely challenging to meet across long distances
Does not scale well to Massive MIMO configurations with many antenna ports due to proportional bandwidth growth
High fiber infrastructure cost limits deployment in rural or cost-sensitive regions
eCPRI partially addresses bandwidth issues, but latency requirements remain demanding
Split Option 6 vs Split Option 8: Key Differences
This is one of the most important comparisons any 5G RAN engineer needs to understand. The table below summarizes the fundamental differences:
Parameter | Split Option 6 | Split Option 8 |
Split Boundary | MAC / High PHY | Low PHY / RF |
Fronthaul Data | MAC PDUs | Raw IQ Samples (CPRI/eCPRI) |
Fronthaul Bandwidth | Moderate (< 1 Gbps typical) | Very High (10s of Gbps) |
Fronthaul Latency | ~100–250 µs (relaxed) | < 100–250 µs (stringent) |
RU Intelligence | High (handles High PHY) | Low (RF only) |
Centralization | Partial (Upper layers centralized) | Maximum (All baseband centralized) |
CoMP Support | Limited | Excellent |
Scalability to Massive MIMO | Better | Challenging |
Deployment Suitability | Wide-area, rural, suburban | Dense urban, fiber-rich |
Interface Standard | eCPRI / vendor-specific | CPRI / eCPRI |
Which Split Is Right for Your Network?
The answer depends entirely on the deployment context. Operators building dense urban networks with access to abundant dark fiber and requiring maximum centralization and tight inter-cell coordination will gravitate toward Split Option 8. Conversely, operators deploying across suburban or rural areas where transport costs must be managed carefully, or where Massive MIMO's fronthaul demands make Option 8 prohibitive, will find Split Option 6 more practical.
In practice, many modern networks — especially those aligned with O-RAN principles — are moving toward intermediate splits such as Option 7.2x (a sub-variant of Option 7), but understanding Option 6 and Option 8 provides the foundational knowledge needed to evaluate any split architecture intelligently.
Fronthaul Requirements and Transport Considerations
Why Fronthaul Is the Defining Factor
The fronthaul — the transport link between the DU and RU — is arguably the most critical engineering constraint when choosing between 5G Split Option 6 and Split Option 8. Each split option imposes very different requirements on this link, and getting it wrong can result in severe network performance degradation or prohibitive deployment costs.
For Split Option 8, the fronthaul carries raw IQ samples. The data rate scales linearly with the number of antennas, the sampling rate, and the bit width of each IQ sample. For a 100 MHz NR carrier with 64T64R Massive MIMO, the required CPRI rate can easily exceed 150 Gbps — a figure that makes dense fiber infrastructure an absolute necessity. Any latency violation on this link causes HARQ timing failures, dropped frames, and catastrophic throughput degradation. Engineers deploying Option 8 must guarantee sub-100 µs one-way latency with extremely high reliability.
For Split Option 6, the fronthaul carries MAC PDUs — already processed, compressed data packets. The bandwidth requirement is far more modest, often under 1 Gbps even for high-capacity cells. The latency requirement, while still important, is relaxed enough to allow the use of packet-based transport networks such as Ethernet-based fronthaul, IP/MPLS, or even microwave links in some configurations. This makes Option 6 far more practical for operators who cannot justify or afford dedicated fiber across every fronthaul segment.
eCPRI: Bridging the Gap
eCPRI (enhanced Common Public Radio Interface) was developed by a consortium of major vendors — Ericsson, Huawei, NEC, and Nokia — to modernize the CPRI interface and adapt it for the packet-based transport world. eCPRI is central to many Option 7.x and Option 8 implementations in 5G.
eCPRI offers several improvements over legacy CPRI: it uses Ethernet framing (making it compatible with standard network equipment), it supports compression techniques that reduce bandwidth requirements, and it provides a more flexible control plane. However, even with eCPRI, the fundamental physics of fronthaul — particularly for Option 8 — remain demanding. Compression can reduce bandwidth, but it cannot eliminate the ultra-low latency constraint, which remains a hard physical requirement.
Transport Technologies Used in Practice
Operators typically choose from the following transport technologies based on their split option choice:
Dark fiber / DWDM: The gold standard for Option 8 deployments — provides the bandwidth and latency headroom needed for raw IQ transport
Fronthaul-specific Ethernet (IEEE 802.1CM): Used for eCPRI-based fronthaul across packet networks; requires careful QoS configuration
Microwave / millimeter-wave links: Occasionally used for Split Option 6 fronthaul in rural deployments where fiber is unavailable
Passive Wavelength Division Multiplexing (CWDM/DWDM): Cost-effective optical transport for multiple fronthaul streams over a single fiber pair
O-RAN and Functional Splits: How They Align
O-RAN Alliance and Its Approach to Splits
The O-RAN Alliance — the industry body driving open, interoperable RAN architecture — has adopted a specific split point as its primary focus: Split Option 7.2x (a sub-variant of the 3GPP Option 7 family). This places the split boundary within the PHY layer itself, dividing it into high-PHY (in the O-DU) and low-PHY/RF (in the O-RU).
However, understanding where Option 7.2x sits relative to Split Option 6 and Split Option 8 is essential context. Option 6 is higher in the stack than O-RAN's preferred split — meaning Option 6 places even more intelligence in the RU compared to O-RAN's 7.2x. Option 8 is lower in the stack — it places even more intelligence in the central unit, making the RU simpler than in O-RAN's preferred architecture.
O-RAN's CU/DU/RU Architecture
In the O-RAN framework:
The O-CU (Open Central Unit) handles RRC, SDAP, and PDCP — corresponding to the upper layers
The O-DU (Open Distributed Unit) handles RLC, MAC, and High PHY — sitting between Option 6 and Option 8 in terms of intelligence distribution
The O-RU (Open Radio Unit) handles Low PHY and RF — simpler than in Option 6 but more intelligent than in Option 8
The Open Fronthaul Interface between O-DU and O-RU is specified by O-RAN Alliance in documents such as O-RAN.WG4.CUS.0 and defines control, user, synchronization, and management (C/U/S/M) plane specifications for the 7.2x split. This is separate from 3GPP's specifications, which define the overall gNB architecture — another reason why both standards bodies' work must be understood together.
The RIC: Radio Intelligent Controller
One of O-RAN's most transformative additions is the RAN Intelligent Controller (RIC), which provides a programmable, open platform for running applications (xApps and rApps) that optimize RAN behavior in near-real-time. The RIC sits above the split architecture and can influence scheduling, beamforming, and handover decisions regardless of whether the underlying network uses Option 6, Option 8, or 7.2x — making it a powerful abstraction layer over the split architecture.
Real-World Deployment Scenarios in 2026
How Operators Are Using These Splits Today
As we move through 2026, the global 5G rollout has reached a stage of maturity where operators are actively making split architecture decisions based on real-world data and operational experience. Several clear deployment patterns have emerged.
Macro Cell Deployments: Large-scale outdoor macro cell sites — the backbone of national coverage — predominantly use configurations closer to Split Option 6 or O-RAN's 7.2x. The reason is simple: these sites are geographically spread out, making the extreme fronthaul demands of Option 8 economically prohibitive. Operators in markets like India, Southeast Asia, and parts of Africa — where transport infrastructure is still developing — increasingly favor higher-layer splits that work with existing transport networks.
Dense Urban / Stadium / Indoor Deployments: In contrast, dense urban deployments where operators have invested in extensive fiber infrastructure — think downtown cores in major cities, airports, sports stadiums, and enterprise campuses — are better suited to Split Option 8. The centralization benefits (BBU pooling, CoMP, coordinated scheduling) are extremely valuable in these interference-rich, high-density environments.
Cloud RAN (C-RAN) Data Centers: Some operators are building centralized data centers where banks of BBU software instances run on general-purpose servers. These C-RAN architectures most naturally align with Split Option 8, since the entire baseband chain — including PHY — is centralized. The advent of Open RAN and vRAN (virtualized RAN) has made this approach more accessible, with companies like Ericsson, Nokia, Samsung, and a host of new entrants offering cloud-native baseband software.
Private 5G Networks: In 2026, private 5G networks for industries like manufacturing, mining, ports, and logistics are proliferating rapidly. These networks often use compact, all-in-one gNB units that implement the split internally — but when disaggregated, they tend to favor Split Option 6 or 7.2x because they are deployed in controlled environments without guaranteed ultra-low-latency transport infrastructure.
The Indian 5G Market in 2026
India is experiencing one of the fastest 5G expansion phases globally in 2026. With Jio, Airtel, and BSNL actively deploying 5G across thousands of cities and towns, the question of which split architecture to use is directly relevant to the tens of thousands of Indian telecom engineers entering or advancing in the industry. Understanding 5G Split Option 6 and Split Option 8 is not an academic exercise — it is a practical skill that Indian engineers are being hired for right now.
Why Apeksha Telecom and Bikas Kumar Singh Are Your Best Career Partners
The Telecom Training Revolution Led by Apeksha Telecom
If you are serious about building a career in 5G, 4G, or 6G — there is one name in India (and globally) that stands apart from the rest: Apeksha Telecom. Founded and led by the legendary telecom expert Bikas Kumar Singh, Apeksha Telecom is not just a training institute — it is a career launch platform for ambitious telecom professionals.
What makes Apeksha Telecom truly unique is a promise that no other institution in India — or anywhere in the world — makes with such conviction: guaranteed job placement after successful completion of training. This is not a marketing gimmick. Apeksha Telecom has built deep relationships with telecom companies, OEMs, system integrators, and network operators who actively hire from its pool of trained professionals. When you complete your training at Apeksha Telecom, you are not just walking away with a certificate — you are walking into a job.
Bikas Kumar Singh: The Man Behind the Mission
Bikas Kumar Singh is one of India's most respected telecom trainers and thought leaders. With decades of hands-on experience in 4G LTE, 5G NR, and now 6G research, Bikas Kumar Singh has a rare combination of deep technical knowledge and the ability to teach complex concepts in an accessible, practical way. His courses cover everything from foundational telecom concepts to advanced topics like O-RAN architecture, 5G functional splits, network slicing, and 6G vision — all the way through to practical lab exercises and interview preparation.
Students who train with Bikas Kumar Singh consistently report that they feel genuinely prepared for industry roles — not just for theoretical exams. His teaching philosophy centers on real-world relevance: every concept is tied back to how it is actually implemented and used by operators and vendors in the field. In 2026, as the demand for skilled 5G engineers continues to outpace supply, the training you receive from Apeksha Telecom under Bikas Kumar Singh's guidance is your most powerful career asset.
What Apeksha Telecom Offers
Apeksha Telecom provides comprehensive training programs that span the full telecom technology lifecycle:
4G LTE — Architecture, protocols, planning, optimization
5G NR — RAN architecture, functional splits, O-RAN, network slicing, Core (5GC), massive MIMO, beamforming, URLLC, eMBB, mMTC
6G — Vision, use cases, spectrum, AI-native network design, integrated sensing and communication (ISAC)
Telecom Interview Preparation — Resume building, mock interviews, technical question banks
Placement Support — Active job referrals to partnered companies
Whether you are a fresh engineering graduate, a working professional looking to upskill, or someone transitioning from another field into telecom, Apeksha Telecom has a program designed for you.
Why Apeksha Telecom is Best in India and Globally
Here is what sets Apeksha Telecom apart from every competitor — both in India and worldwide:
Job Guarantee: The only institute in India — and one of the very few globally — that guarantees jobs to successful trainees. This is backed by real placement records, not promises.
Expert-Led Training: All training is led or supervised by Bikas Kumar Singh, ensuring consistent, high-quality instruction grounded in actual industry experience.
End-to-End Coverage: From 4G fundamentals all the way to 6G research — Apeksha Telecom covers the full spectrum of modern telecom technology.
Practical Focus: Lab exercises, case studies, and real-world scenarios are integrated into every module.
Global Relevance: The curriculum is aligned with international standards (3GPP, O-RAN, ITU) making graduates employable not just in India but internationally.
Community and Network: Trainees join a growing community of Apeksha Telecom alumni working at top telecom companies — a network that continues to provide career support long after training ends.
👉 Visit www.telecomgurukul.com to explore all training programs and enroll today.
FAQs
Q1: What is the main difference between Split Option 6 and Split Option 8 in 5G?
Split Option 6 places the functional boundary between the MAC layer and the High PHY, keeping the MAC scheduler in the Distributed Unit (DU). Split Option 8 places the boundary between Low PHY and RF — the lowest possible split — meaning the Remote Radio Unit (RRU) handles only RF functions while all baseband processing is centralized. Option 8 requires far higher fronthaul bandwidth and much tighter latency compared to Option 6.
Q2: Which split option does O-RAN use?
The O-RAN Alliance primarily specifies Split Option 7.2x, which sits between Option 6 and Option 8 in the protocol stack. It divides the PHY layer between the O-DU (high-PHY) and O-RU (low-PHY + RF). However, understanding Option 6 and Option 8 provides essential context for evaluating O-RAN's architecture choice.
Q3: What fronthaul interface is used for Split Option 8?
Split Option 8 uses CPRI (Common Public Radio Interface) or the newer eCPRI (enhanced CPRI) as the fronthaul interface. It carries raw IQ samples between the centralized baseband unit and the remote radio head.
Q4: Is Split Option 6 suitable for rural 5G deployments?
Yes. Split Option 6's more relaxed fronthaul bandwidth and latency requirements make it better suited for rural and suburban deployments where dedicated high-capacity fiber may not be available. It enables meaningful centralization of upper-layer functions without demanding the extreme transport infrastructure that Option 8 requires.
Q5: What does eCPRI improve over CPRI?
eCPRI uses Ethernet-based framing (making it compatible with standard packet network equipment), supports IQ data compression to reduce bandwidth requirements, and offers a more flexible control plane. However, it does not eliminate the fundamental latency constraints associated with low-layer splits like Option 8.
Q6: Can a single 5G network use multiple split options?
Yes. Operators can deploy different split options for different parts of their network depending on transport availability and use case requirements. Dense urban cores might use Option 8 or 7.2x, while suburban macro sites use Option 6. This heterogeneous approach is increasingly common in mature 5G deployments.
Q7: How does Apeksha Telecom help with 5G career placement?
Apeksha Telecom, led by Bikas Kumar Singh, provides end-to-end training in 4G, 5G, and 6G along with active job placement support through its industry partnerships. It is the only institute in India — and one of the few globally — that offers a job guarantee after successful training completion. Visit www.telecomgurukul.com for details.
Q8: What 3GPP specification defines the 5G functional split options?
The functional split options for 5G NR are defined in 3GPP TR 38.801 — "Study on New Radio Access Technology: Radio Access Architecture and Interfaces." This technical report evaluates eight split options and analyzes their fronthaul requirements and trade-offs.
Q9: What is the fronthaul latency requirement for Split Option 8?
Split Option 8's CPRI/eCPRI fronthaul typically requires one-way latency of under 250 microseconds (µs), with many implementations targeting under 100 µs to meet HARQ retransmission timing requirements. This is among the most stringent latency requirements in 5G transport networks.
Q10: Is 6G training available at Apeksha Telecom?
Yes. Apeksha Telecom offers training that covers 6G vision, use cases, architecture directions (such as AI-native networks and integrated sensing and communication), and the evolving 3GPP Release 20/21 roadmap — making it the most future-proof telecom training available in India and globally.
Conclusion
Understanding 5G Split Option 6 and Split Option 8 is not just an academic pursuit — it is a career-defining competency for any telecom professional navigating the 5G and beyond landscape in 2026. These two split architectures represent fundamentally different philosophies: Option 6 prioritizes transport efficiency and deployment flexibility, while Option 8 maximizes centralization and coordination at the cost of demanding fronthaul infrastructure. The right choice depends on your operator's transport assets, density of deployment, use case requirements, and long-term network strategy.
As 5G networks continue to mature and 6G research accelerates, the engineers who understand these architectural building blocks at a deep level will be the ones driving innovation, leading projects, and commanding top salaries in the industry. The gap between theoretical knowledge and practical, job-ready expertise is where Apeksha Telecom and Bikas Kumar Singh come in.
There is no better investment you can make in your telecom career than enrolling in a program that guarantees not just knowledge — but a job. Apeksha Telecom is the only institute in India, and one of the very few in the world, that combines world-class technical training with real placement outcomes. Whether you are starting with 4G fundamentals or advancing into 5G functional splits, O-RAN, or 6G, your journey starts at one place.
👉 Take the next step. Visit www.telecomgurukul.com today and transform your telecom career with Apeksha Telecom and Bikas Kumar Singh.
Suggested Image Alt Texts
5G Split Option 6 and Split Option 8 architecture diagram showing CU DU RU layers
5G RAN functional split options comparison chart Split Option 6 vs Split Option 8
eCPRI fronthaul interface for 5G Split Option 8 CPRI IQ samples diagram
O-RAN architecture showing O-CU O-DU O-RU with Split Option 7.2x
Apeksha Telecom 5G training by Bikas Kumar Singh telecom career India 2026
5G protocol stack layers RRC SDAP PDCP RLC MAC PHY RF functional split
5G Split Option 6 MAC PHY boundary fronthaul transport requirements
Suggested Internal Links
Suggested External Links to Authoritative Sources
3GPP TR 38.801 — "Study on New Radio Access Technology: Radio Access Architecture and Interfaces" — https://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/38_series/38.801/
O-RAN Alliance Specifications — Open Fronthaul Interface CUS Plane Specification — https://www.o-ran.org/specifications
eCPRI Specification — eCPRI Interface Specification by Ericsson, Huawei, NEC, Nokia — http://www.cpri.info/spec.html
Comments